Purpose: To evaluate and compare peri-implant health, marginal bone loss and success of immediate and delayed
implant placement for rehabilitation with full-arch fixed prostheses.
Material
and Methods: The present study was a prospective, randomized, single-blind, clinical preliminary trial.
Patients were randomized into two treatment groups. In Group A implants were placed immediately post-extrac
-
tion and in Group B six months after extraction. The following control time-points were established: one week,
six months and twelve months after loading. Measurements were taken of peri-implant crevicular fluid volume,
plaque index, gingival retraction, keratinized mucosa, probing depth, modified gingival index and presence of
mucositis. Implant success rates were evaluated for the two groups. The study sample included fifteen patients
(nine women and six men) with a mean average age of 63....
[Llegir més ...]

[-]

Purpose: To evaluate and compare peri-implant health, marginal bone loss and success of immediate and delayed
implant placement for rehabilitation with full-arch fixed prostheses.
Material
and Methods: The present study was a prospective, randomized, single-blind, clinical preliminary trial.
Patients were randomized into two treatment groups. In Group A implants were placed immediately post-extrac
-
tion and in Group B six months after extraction. The following control time-points were established: one week,
six months and twelve months after loading. Measurements were taken of peri-implant crevicular fluid volume,
plaque index, gingival retraction, keratinized mucosa, probing depth, modified gingival index and presence of
mucositis. Implant success rates were evaluated for the two groups. The study sample included fifteen patients
(nine women and six men) with a mean average age of 63.7 years. One hundred and forty-four implants were
placed: 76 placed in healed sites and 68 placed immediately.
Results: At the moment of prosthetic loading, keratinized mucosa width and probing depth were higher in im
-
mediate implants than delayed implants, with statistically significant differences. However, after six and twelve
months, differences between groups had disappeared. Bone loss was 0.54 ± 0.39 mm for immediate implants and
0.66 ± 0.25 mm for delayed implants (
p
=0.201). No implants failed in either group.
Conclusions: The present study with a short follow-up and a small sample yielded no statistically significant dif
-
ferences in implant success and peri-implant marginal bone loss between immediate and delayed implants with
fixed full-arch prostheses. Peri-implant health showed no statistically significant differences for any of the studied
parameters (crevicular fluid volume, plaque index, gingival retraction, keratinized mucosa, probing depth, modified
gingival index and presence of mucositis) at the twelve-month follow-up.